On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 03:00:16PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 11:13 +0200, Wolfram Quester wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 05:02:36PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > > On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 17:38 +0200, Wolfram Quester wrote: > > > > > > > there is another appearence of the same bug, but with another extension, > > > > which was not captured by the last upload: > > > > > > > This won't be the same bug, but a different one; turning this into a new > > > bug report. > > Well, I think it is the same as #316470. > > > Bit of a silly thing to argue about ;) It's a different line of code, > so a different bug, just a similar one... but, in fact: > > > Yes, lintian inkscape_0.41-5.dsc works, but the output I sent was from a > > new package I just built. You can download the new orig.tar.gz via > > > > wget > > http://switch.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/inkscape/inkscape-0.41+0.42pre0.tar.gz > > mv inkscape-0.41+0.42pre0.tar.gz inkscape_0.41+0.42pre0.orig.tar.gz > > > > .dsc and .diff.gz are appended to this mail. If I do > > lintian inkscape_0.41+0.42pre0.dsc I get the aforementioned error. > > > Those are illegal filenames, diff.gz _MUST_ have a Debian revision. > > Therefore this isn't a bug (other than a confusing error message). OK, so we could make this a whishlist bug entitled "lintian should indicate that packages must have debian revision".
Thanks for your clearification though. In this package I forgot the debian revision and I thought, I wont rebuild it since the package is a pre version with probably a short lifetime. Thanks for your help, Wolfi > > Scott > -- > Have you ever, ever felt like this? > Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
